A Two-Step Screen: Why the 50% Threshold Was Abandoned
Index provider MSCI has launched a consultation that could exclude so-called non-operating companies from its Global Investable Market Indexes. Instead of a single crypto-asset concentration threshold, the proposal uses a two-step screen: first, whether operating assets exceed 50% of total assets; companies that fail then face five financial ratios—operating asset intensity, expense intensity, cash flow, fair-value intensity and capital dependence—and must fail at least four to be excluded. Applied to current data, MSCI ACWI IMI would remove Strategy, Metaplanet and uranium holder Yellow Cake.Investors should also watch the consultation's definitional details: what counts as an operating asset, how fair-value intensity is measured for volatile BTC holdings, and whether derivatives or lending revenue can offset capital dependence. These parameters determine whether the screen is a real economic test or a de facto crypto exclusion.
Two Named Treasuries and the Index-Flow Reaction
The two named Bitcoin treasuries differ in scale but share a structure: Strategy has accumulated about 840,400 BTC since 2020 and Metaplanet holds roughly 43,000 BTC, while both rely on external financing and generate limited operating cash flow. An index change does not sell shares directly, but it alters how passive funds and institutional benchmarks hold these names, forcing ETFs and pension portfolios to rebalance. In October 2025, an earlier MSCI consultation using a 50% crypto-asset threshold caused market volatility and industry opposition before being delayed. The shift to five financial ratios shows rule design moving from asset labels toward operating substance.The final outcome also depends on consultation feedback. If the industry demonstrates quantifiable operating revenue or Bitcoin-derivative cash flow, some companies may preserve index eligibility through improved financial disclosure.For index funds, the practical task is to predefine rebalance triggers: what happens if MSCI's final decision removes these names mid-quarter, whether transition provisions apply and how cash drag or forced selling is managed. Treasury companies, in turn, can respond by improving disclosure quality: publishing quarterly wallet reconciliation, pledging transparency and revenue segmentation makes the five financial ratios easier to defend. Both sides benefit from a shared, verifiable on-chain record that turns an index consultation from a governance debate into a data-driven decision.
From Asset Labels to Operating Substance: Disclosure as the Decider
On-chain transparency is becoming a foundational credit asset for treasury companies, beyond index eligibility. The consultation closes September 30, results are expected around October 16, and even if approved, changes would take effect no earlier than the November 2026 index review—a real window to improve disclosure. Trustformer KYT can help treasury companies build verifiable holdings disclosure: reconcile disclosed wallets periodically, separate pledged from free holdings and record financing and buyback traces on-chain. Financial ratios such as operating-asset intensity and capital dependence then have chain-based evidence, giving investors an independent risk view before any index change lands.For ETFs and funds holding these names, scenario analysis ahead of the decision beats reactive adjustment: model exclusion, retention and transitional arrangements with their portfolio shifts, tax effects and liquidity costs, while tracking wallet movements to detect early positioning by large shareholders before the result is published.For compliance teams at custodians and index funds, the November window is also a liquidity-planning horizon: position size, market depth and the tax impact of forced sales should be modeled now, and on-chain monitoring of Strategy's and Metaplanet's wallets—including pledge, loan and acquisition flows—should continue regardless of the final index decision.